September 2007 - jboss-dev-forums

[Design of AOP on JBoss (Aspects/JBoss)] - Re: AOP asintegration WITHOUT the integration :-)

by kabir.khan＠jboss.com

That's bizarre, my last post seems to have overwritten yours, and our names have been reversed?!?!? For completeness, here is the post that I was replying to "adrian" wrote : | | "kabir.khan(a)jboss.com" wrote : wrote : Do you have some pointers to the classloading rules? I still need to get my head around this part, but in the meantime do you think we need special ClassPools as well? | | I think the javassist ClassPath is closer to how the new classloaders work. | The deployers could create a ClassPool/ClassPath structure | that matches the classloader configuration. | | Like I said I don't think determining what configuration applies based on class | locations/visibility is the correct solution anyway, even though I did manage to fix | some issues by making AOP use ClassPool.getClassLoader() instead of the TCL. | | >From the tests I wrote in the AOP integration, the basic ScopedClassPool of javassist | seems to be able to handle what we need for OSGi? | View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4081018#4081018 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4081018

16 years, 8 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: expression or execute

by pete.muir＠jboss.org

Why do you not like deprecation? Because you prefer expression to execute? Or because of keeping the language the same? Or...? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4081016#4081016 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4081016

16 years, 8 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of AOP on JBoss (Aspects/JBoss)] - Re: AOP asintegration WITHOUT the integration :-)

by adrian＠jboss.org

"kabir.khan(a)jboss.com" wrote : Do you have some pointers to the classloading rules? I still need to get my head around this part, but in the meantime do you think we need special ClassPools as well? I think the javassist ClassPath is closer to how the new classloaders work. The deployers could create a ClassPool/ClassPath structure that matches the classloader configuration. Like I said I don't think determining what configuration applies based on class locations/visibility is the correct solution anyway, even though I did manage to fix some issues by making AOP use ClassPool.getClassLoader() instead of the TCL. >From the tests I wrote in the AOP integration, the basic ScopedClassPool of javassist seems to be able to handle what we need for OSGi? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4081008#4081008 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4081008

16 years, 8 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of AOP on JBoss (Aspects/JBoss)] - Re: AOP asintegration WITHOUT the integration :-)

by kabir.khan＠jboss.com

"adrian(a)jboss.org" wrote : "kabir.khan(a)jboss.com" wrote : | | You and Bill are cut from the same cloth. ;-) | | http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&t=113494 | | lol - well he was the one who discovered me - or the other way round or something View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4081007#4081007 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4081007

16 years, 8 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of AOP on JBoss (Aspects/JBoss)] - Re: AOP asintegration WITHOUT the integration :-)

by adrian＠jboss.org

"kabir.khan(a)jboss.com" wrote : How do I turn on these new classloaders in jboss-head? I'd like to see how this all hangs together... You and Bill are cut from the same cloth. ;-) http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&t=113494 View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4081006#4081006 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4081006

16 years, 8 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: Adding ManagedObjectCreator support to AbstractSimpleRea

by adrian＠jboss.org

"scott.stark(a)jboss.org" wrote : Note that the parameterized type for these deployers should really be AbstractSimpleRealDeployer<T extends Serializable> as the deployment instance needs to be castable to Serializable for the ManagedObjectFactory. | You can't do that. Its perfectly possible that the AbstractRealDeployer is dealing with a transient attachment that is not intended for the management layer. In fact, thinking about it. We shouldn't be encouraging the real deployers to do the managed objects anyway. That should really be done in the parsing deployers. I would be in favour of making the parsing deployers require Serializable attachments which would mean the AppParsing deployer would currently fail to compile. ;-) If both the parsing deployer and the real deployer have this code for the same attachment its going to duplicate work. So I'd like to change my vote to no. :-) Although you could add a configuration flag to the deployer: | private boolean buildManagedObject = false; // + getter and setter | public void build(DeploymentUnit unit, Map<String, ManagedObject> managedObjects) | { | if (buildManagedObject) | { | ... | } | } | so it would be easy to enable it in other cases, i.e. via the configuration of the deployer. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4081003#4081003 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4081003

16 years, 8 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of JBossCache] - Re: JBCACHE-1154 - Introduce ability to mark nodes as reside

by jason.greene＠jboss.com

"mircea.markus" wrote : an boolean is hold on a bit. An RegularEnumSet aggregates an long (64 bit) + some caching arrays (other bits as well). From a memory POV it is optimal to aggregate booleans directly (than EnumSets wrapping enums). | A boolean is sizeof(unsigned char) which is a byte on every platform I know of. An array reference is the size of a pointer, so typically 32 or 64bit. There are 2. So when accounting for the reference to the EnumSet itself, on a 32 bit architecture you need more than 20 booleans to exceed the space utilization of an enumset with 64 or less Enums. java.util.BitSet uses slightly less space than EnumSet (1 array ref + 1 32 bit value). That said, any efficiency gain here is neligable, so we should be focusing on what best fits the design. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4081002#4081002 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4081002

16 years, 8 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of AOP on JBoss (Aspects/JBoss)] - Re: AOP asintegration WITHOUT the integration :-)

by kabir.khan＠jboss.com

Do you have some pointers to the classloading rules? I still need to get my head around this part, but in the meantime do you think we need special ClassPools as well? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4081001#4081001 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4081001

16 years, 8 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design of AOP on JBoss (Aspects/JBoss)] - Re: AOP asintegration WITHOUT the integration :-)

by kabir.khan＠jboss.com

How do I turn on these new classloaders in jboss-head? I'd like to see how this all hangs together... View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4080999#4080999 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4080999

16 years, 8 months

1
0
0 / 0

[Design the new POJO MicroContainer] - Re: Adding ManagedObjectCreator support to AbstractSimpleRea

by scott.stark＠jboss.org

Note that the parameterized type for these deployers should really be AbstractSimpleRealDeployer<T extends Serializable> as the deployment instance needs to be castable to Serializable for the ManagedObjectFactory. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4080976#4080976 Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4080976

16 years, 8 months

1
0
0 / 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

jboss-dev-forums September 2007